International Journal of Thermophysics, Vol. 27, No.

2, March 2006 (© 2006)

DOI: 10.1007/s10765-006-0054-1

Experimental Study on the Effective Thermal

Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity of Nanofluids
X. Zhang,1,2 H. Gu,3 and M. Fujii1

Received November 22, 2005

This paper reports measurements of the effective thermal conductivity and

thermal diffusivity of various nanofluids using the transient short-hot-wire
technique. To remove the influences of the static charge and electrical con-
ductance of the nanoparticles on measurement accuracy, the short-hot-wire
probes are carefully coated with a pure Al2 O3 thin film. Using distilled water
and toluene as standard liquids of known thermal conductivity and ther-
mal diffusivity, the length and radius of the hot wire and the thickness of
the Al2 O3 film are calibrated before and after application of the coating.
The electrical leakage of the short-hot-wire probes is frequently checked, and
only those probes that are coated well are used for measurements. In the
present study, the effective thermal conductivities and thermal diffusivities
of Al2 O3 /water, ZrO2 /water, TiO2 /water, and CuO/water nanofluids are mea-
sured and the effects of the volume fractions and thermal conductivities of
nanoparticles and temperature are clarified. The average diameters of Al2 O3 ,
ZrO2 , TiO2 , and CuO particles are 20, 20, 40, and 33 nm, respectively. The
uncertainty of the present measurements is estimated to be within 1% for
the thermal conductivity and 5% for the thermal diffusivity. The measured
results demonstrate that the effective thermal conductivities of the nanofluids
show no anomalous enhancement and can be predicted accurately by the
model equation of Hamilton and Crosser, when the spherical nanoparticles
are dispersed into fluids.

KEY WORDS: nanofluids; short-hot-wire method; thermal conductivity; ther-

mal diffusivity.

1 Institute for Materials Chemistry and Engineering, Kyushu University, Kasuga 816-8580,
Japan.
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: xzhang@cm.kyushu-u.ac.jp
3 Interdisciplinary Graduate School of Engineering Sciences, Kyushu University, Kasuga

816-8580, Japan.

569
0195-928X/06/0300-0569/0 © 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
570 Zhang, Gu, and Fujii

1. INTRODUCTION
The thermophysical properties of fluids containing spherical or cylin-
drical solid particles have been investigated for several decades [1–5]. Since
a large enhanced thermal conductivity for a dispersion of metallic or non-
metallic nanoparticles or nanotubes in conventional fluids was reported
and the term of nanofluids was coined by Choi [6] in 1995, many research-
ers [7–10] have reported their theoretical, numerical, and experimental
results on the thermophysical properties of nanofluids. Recently, Kumar
et al. [11] reported an enhanced thermal conductivity of about 20% for
a nanofluid of only 0.00013% Au in water. Since such an anomalous
enhancement is expected to have wide applications in thermal engineer-
ing, nanofluids have received considerable attention in thermal science and
engineering. However, it is very difficult to explain why nanofluids would
have such a high thermal conductivity. Meanwhile, there are large differ-
ences among the thermal conductivities reported by different researchers.
Therefore, it is necessary to reconsider the reliability of the measurements
reported so far.
This paper reports on accurate measurements of the effective ther-
mal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of various nanofluids by using
a transient short-hot-wire (SHW) technique. To remove the influences of
the static charge and electrical conductance of the nanoparticles on mea-
surement accuracy, the SHW probes are coated by a pure Al2 O3 thin
film with a sputtering apparatus. The electrical leakage of the coated
SHW probes is carefully checked, and only those probes that are coated
well are used for measurements. The tested nanofluids are Al2 O3 /water,
ZrO2 /water, TiO2 /water, and CuO/water, and measurements are carried out
for various volume fractions and temperatures. The nanoparticles are all
spherical and the average diameters of Al2 O3 , ZrO2 , TiO2 , and CuO par-
ticles are 20, 20, 40, and 33 nm, respectively. The measured results show
that the effective thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity increase gen-
erally as the volume fraction of the particles increases. However, the effec-
tive thermal conductivities of the nanofluids do not show an anomalous
enhancement for the case of a dilute dispersion of these spherical nanopar-
ticles, and can be accurately predicted by the model equation of Hamilton
and Crosser [1].

2. EXPERIMENTS
The effective thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of nanofl-
uids are simultaneously measured by the transient SHW technique. Since
the principle and procedures of the SHW technique have been described
Effective Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity of Nanofluids 571

in detail previously [12–14], only a brief description is given here. The

SHW technique was developed from the conventional transient hot-wire
(THW) technique and was based on the numerical solution of two-dimen-
sional transient heat conduction for a short wire with the same length-
to-diameter ratio and boundary conditions as those used in the actual
measurements. The numerical results for the
dimensionless volume-aver-
aged hot wire temperature rise θv [=(Tv − T0 ) (qv r 2/λ)] are approximated
by a linear

equation in terms of the logarithm of the Fourier number
F o[= (αt) r 2 ], where T0 and Tv are the initial liquid temperature and vol-
ume-averaged hot wire temperature, respectively, qv is the heating rate gen-
erated per unit volume, r is the radius of the SHW, t is the time, and
λ and α are the thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of liquid,
respectively. The coefficients A and B, the slope and intercept, are deter-
mined by the least-squares method for a relevant range of Fourier num-
ber corresponding to the measuring periods. The measured temperature
rise ∆Tv [= Tv − T0 ] of the wire is also approximated by a linear equation
with coefficients a and b, which are also determined by the least-squares
method for the time range before the onset of natural convection. A com-
parison of the above two equations allows us to evaluate the thermal con-
ductivity (λ) and thermal diffusivity (α) of nanofluids from
VI A
λ= (1)
πl a
and
 
2 b B
α = r exp − (2)
a A
where r and l are the radius and length of the hot wire, and V and I are
the voltage and current supplied to the wire.
A SHW probe and a Teflon cell with a volume of about 30 cm3 were
designed and fabricated. Figure 1a shows the dimensions of the SHW
probe used in the present measurements. The SHW probe is mounted
on the Teflon cap of the cell. A short platinum (Pt) wire with a length
of 14.5 mm and a diameter of 20 µm is welded at both ends to Pt lead
wires of 1.5 mm in diameter. Using distilled water and toluene as stan-
dard liquids of known thermophysical properties, the length and radius
of the hot wire and the thickness of the Al2 O3 film are calibrated before
and after application of the insulating film coating. Figure 1b shows the
dimensions of the Teflon cell used for nanofluid measurements. It has
an inner diameter of 30 mm and a height of 47 mm so that the total
inner volume is 33.2 cm3 . Two thermocouples are located at the same
height to the upper and lower welding spots of the hot wire and lead
572 Zhang, Gu, and Fujii

f 40

f 30
6

74.2
47
10

Thermocouple
14.5

Lead wires
60
40

(f1.5 mm)
10 10
Hot wire
(f 20 µm)
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Schematic of the short-hot-wire probe and experimental cell
(dimensions in mm).

wires, respectively, to monitor the temperature homogeneity. In order to

minimize temperature fluctuations, the hot-wire cell was placed in a ther-
mostatic bath at the control temperature for which the thermal conduc-
tivity measurements were performed. Based on the uncertainty analysis
given by Zhang and Fujii [14], the uncertainties of thermal conductivity
and thermal diffusivity measurements in the present study are estimated to
be within 1.0% and 5.0%, respectively.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The samples of Al2 O3 /water, ZrO2 /water, and TiO2 /water nanofluids
were made by Sigma-Aldrich Co., where the powders were directly dis-
persed into the deionized water with a sonic method. The CuO/water
nanofluid was directly made by the present authors with the same method.
All the samples used in the present study have no surfactants. Generally,
the particles themselves have an inherent static charge. The absolute value
is very small, but due to the extremely small size of the particles, the
charge is large enough to keep them in suspension without settling and
aggregation. For the cases of lower volume fractions, our measurements
Effective Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity of Nanofluids 573

have shown that the values of the effective thermal conductivity and
thermal diffusivity did not change over a period of 48 hours.
Figure 2 shows the transmission electron microscope (TEM) photo-
graphs of Al2 O3 , ZrO2 , TiO2 , and CuO particles used for the present
measurements. It is noted that, because the TEM must work in a vacuum,
these photographs were taken only after drying the nanofluids. Therefore,
we can clearly know the shape and size of the nanoparticles by TEM pho-
tographs, but not the intrinsic dispersion of nanoparticles in the water.
Figures 3a and 3b show the measured effective thermal conductivity
and thermal diffusivity of Al2 O3 /water nanofluids for mass fractions of
particles φw = 0, 10, 20, and 40%. For distilled water (φw = 0) the present
results in the temperature range of 5–50◦ C agree well with the standard
values recommended in Refs. 15 and 16. As shown in Fig. 3, the effec-
tive thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of the nanofluids increase
with an increase in the particle concentration and in the temperature. Fur-
thermore, as for the temperature dependence, the slopes are the same as

Fig. 2. TEM photographs of Al2 O3 , ZrO2 , TiO2 , and CuO particles.

574 Zhang, Gu, and Fujii

(a) 0.9
Ref. data for water [15]
Water-Al 2O3
Distilled water
fw = 10%
λeff , W m-1 K-1

0.8
fw = 20%
fw = 40%
0.7

0.6

0.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
o
T, C

(b) 2.5
Ref. data for water [16]
Distilled water
Water-Al 2 O3
fw = 10%
2 -1

fw = 20%
αeff , 10 m s

2 f w = 40%
-7

1.5

1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
o
T, C
Fig. 3. Effective (a) thermal conductivity and (b) thermal
diffusivity of water-Al2 O3 nanofluids.

those for pure water. This means that the temperature-dependent ther-
mal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of nanoparticles do not affect the
temperature dependence of the effective thermal conductivity and thermal
diffusivity of nanofluids in the range of the present concentrations.
Figures 4a and 4b show the effective thermal conductivity and
thermal diffusivity of Al2 O3 /water nanofluids for different particle concen-
trations and temperatures. In these figures, the thermal conductivity and
thermal diffusivity are normalized by using the values of pure water. The
present thermal conductivities are close to those measured by Lee et al.
[8] and Xie et al. [9], but lower than ones obtained by Masuda et al. [5].
The solid line further represents the values predicted by the Hamilton and
Crosser model equation (H-C model) [1], where the effective thermal con-
ductivity, λeff , is expressed as
Effective Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity of Nanofluids 575

(a) 2
H-C model [1] Water-Al 2 O3
o
Measured at 10 C
1.8 o
Measured at 30 C
o
Measured at 50 C
λ eff / λf

1.6 Masuda et al. [5]

Lee et al. [8]
Xie et al. [9]
1.4

1.2

1
0 5 10 15
f v, %

(b) 2
H-C model [1] Water-Al 2O 3
o
1.8 Measured at 10 C
o
Measured at 30 C
α eff /α f

o
1.6 Measured at 50 C

1.4

1.2

1
0 5 10 15
f v, %
Fig. 4. Normalized (a) thermal conductivity and
(b) thermal diffusivity of water-Al2 O3 nanofluids.

[λ2 + (n − 1) λ1 − (n − 1) φv (λ1 − λ2 )]
λeff = λ1 (3)
[λ2 + (n − 1) λ1 + φv (λ1 − λ2 )]

Here, λ1 and λ2 are the thermal conductivity of the fluid and particles,
respectively. And n is a constant that depends on the shape of the dis-
persed particles and on the ratio of the conductivities of the two phases.
When the particles are spherical, the theoretical result shows that n is
equal to 3 and independent of both the particle size and the ratio of the
conductivities. Therefore, in the present paper, n is taken to be 3. φv is the
volume fraction of the particles and is calculated by

φ w ρw
φv = (4)
ρ p + φw ρ w − φw ρ p
576 Zhang, Gu, and Fujii

Fig. 5. Normalized (a) thermal conductivity and

(b) thermal diffusivity of water-ZrO2 nanofluids.

where ρw and ρp are the density of the fluid and particles, respectively. φw
is the mass fraction of the particles dispersed in the nanofluids. Based on
the definition of the thermal diffusivity, the effective thermal diffusivity of
nanofluids can be calculated by
λeff
αeff = (5)
ρeff Ceff
where ρeff and Ceff can be calculated by

ρeff = ρp φv + ρw (1 − φv ) (6)

and

Ceff = Cp φw + Cw (1 − φw ) (7)
Effective Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity of Nanofluids 577

(a) 1.1
H-C model [1] Water-TiO 2
1.08 Measured at 10o C
Measured at 30o C
o
λeff / λ f

Measured at 40 C
1.06
Masuda et al. [5]

1.04

1.02

1
0 1 2 3
f v, %

(b) 1.1
H-C model [1] Water-TiO 2
1.08 Measured at 10oC
o
Measured at 30 C
Measured at 40oC
α eff /α f

1.06

1.04

1.02

1
0 1 2 3
f v, %
Fig. 6. Normalized (a) thermal conductivity and
(b) thermal diffusivity of water-TiO2 nanofluids.

and Cw and Cp are the specific heat capacities of the fluid and particles,
respectively.
As shown in Fig. 4, the present effective thermal conductivity and
thermal diffusivity in a lower volume fraction range agree well with the
values predicted by the H-C model. On the other hand, in the higher vol-
ume fraction range, the measured results are lower than the predicted val-
ues. This is due to the settling of some fraction of particles that occurred
at the higher volume fraction. Furthermore, the normalized thermal con-
ductivity and thermal diffusivity are almost independent of the tempera-
ture. This confirms that the temperature dependence of these properties of
nanofluids is not dominated by the solid phase but by the fluid phase.
Figures 5 to 7 show the normalized effective thermal conductivity
and thermal diffusivity of ZrO2 /water, TiO2 /water, and CuO/water nano-
fluids. The present thermal conductivities agree well with those obtained
578 Zhang, Gu, and Fujii

(a)

(b) 1.6
H-C model [1]
1.5 o
Water-CuO
Measured at 10 C
o
Measured at 23 C
α eff / α f

1.4 o
Measured at 30 C
1.3

1.2

1.1

1
0 2 4 6 8 10
f v, %
Fig. 7. Normalized (a) thermal conductivity and
(b) thermal diffusivity of water-CuO nanofluids.

by Masuda et al. [5] for TiO2 /water nanofluids shown in Fig. 6a, but
are lower than ones obtained by Lee et al. [8] and Das et al. [17] for
CuO/water nanofluids shown in Fig. 7a. All of the present values in a
range of lower volume fractions agree well with those predicted by the
H-C model, although the absolute values are dependent on the thermal
properties of nanoparticles.
The results mentioned above, together with consideration of the pres-
ent measurement uncertainty, clearly indicate that the dispersion of nano-
particles does not cause any anomalous enhancements for the thermal
conductivity and thermal diffusivity as those reported by some other
authors [6, 11]. Furthermore, the magnitude of the enhancement can be
predicted using the existing model. Although it is very difficult to point
out clearly the problems encountered in the previous experiments [6, 11],
it is found that the electrical insulation of the hot-wire probe is very
Effective Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity of Nanofluids 579

important when the hot-wire method is applied to measurements of nano-

fluids. Even in our measurements, an insufficient insulation of the wire
has resulted in clustering of nanoparticles on the wire surface, and then
in much different values of the thermal conductivity and thermal diffu-
sivity of nanofluids. Furthermore, proper mixing and stabilization of the
particles are also very important. To check the stabilization of the parti-
cles, we have measured the volume fraction of the particles after the exper-
iments as well as observed the time variation of the thermal conductivity
and thermal diffusivity.

4. CONCLUSIONS
The effective thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity of
Al2 O3 /water, ZrO2 /water, TiO2 /water, and CuO/water nanofluids have been
measured accurately for various volume fractions and temperatures. The
present results show that the effective thermal conductivity and thermal
diffusivity increase with an increase in the particle concentration and in
the thermal conductivity of nanoparticles. The effective thermal conduc-
tivities of nanofluids have not shown any anomalous enhancements. All of
the measured values agree well with those predicted by the H-C model at
lower volume fractions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge a lot of assistance and useful discussion
given by Dr. H. Q. Xie from Shanghai Institute of Ceramics, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, China and Dr. W. M. Qiao from the Institute for
Materials Chemistry and Engineering, Kyushu University, Japan.

REFERENCES

1. R. L. Hamilton and O. K. Crosser, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1:187 (1962).

2. T. Kumada, Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Engrs. 41:1209 (1975).
3. E. Yamada and T. Ota, Wärme- und Stoffübertragung 13:27 (1980).
4. H. Sasaki and H. Masuda, in Proc. 3rd Asian Thermophys. Prop. Conf. (1992), p. 425.
5. H. Masuda, A. Ebata, K. Teramae, and N. Hishinuma, Jpn. J. Thermophys. Prop. 7:227
(1993).
6. S. U. S. Choi, Developments and Applications of Non-Newtonian Flows, FED-231/MD-
66:99 (ASME, New York, 1995).
7. X. Wang, X. Xu, and S. U. S. Choi, J. Thermophys. Heat Transfer 13:474 (1999).
8. S. Lee, S. U. S. Choi, S. Li, and J. A. Eastman, J. Heat Transfer 121:280 (1999).
9. H. Q. Xie, J. Wang, T. Xi, Y. Liu, and F. Ai, J. Appl. Phys. 91:4568 (2002).
10. Y. Xuan, Q. Li, and W. Hu, AIChE J. 49:1038 (2003).
580 Zhang, Gu, and Fujii

11. D. Hemanth Kumar, Hrishikesh E. Patel, V. R. Rajeev Kumar, T. Sundararajan,

T. Pradeep, and Sarit K. Das, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93:144301 (2004).
12. X. Zhang, T. Tomimura, and M. Fujii, in Proc. 14th Japan Symp. Thermophys. Prop. (Jpn.
Soc. Thermophys. Prop., 1993), p. 23.
13. M. Fujii, X. Zhang, N. Imaishi, S. Fujiwara, and T. Sakamoto, Int. J. Thermophys. 18:327
(1997).
14. X. Zhang and M. Fujii, Int. J. Thermophys. 21:71 (2000).
15. C. A. Nieto de Castro, S. F. Y. Li, A. Nagashima, R. D. Trengove, and W. A. Wakeham,
J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 15:1073 (1986).
16. JSME Data Book: Heat Transfer, 4th Ed. (1986), p. 331.
17. S. K. Das, N. Putra, P. Thiesen, and W. Roetzel, J. Heat Transfer 125:567 (2003).